Legal Protection for the Notarial Office when Designated as a Suspect In a Criminal Case
##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.main##
Published
Jul 3, 2025
Abstract
Legal protection for notaries constitutes a fundamental element in maintaining the independence, professionalism, and public trust in the notarial office as a public official. The Law on the Office of Notary, particularly Article 4 paragraph (2) and Article 16 paragraph (1) letter f, affirms the obligation of notaries to maintain the confidentiality of the contents of deeds and any information obtained in the course of their duties. However, the phrase “unless otherwise stipulated by law” creates broad room for interpretation and potentially gives rise to legal uncertainty. Therefore, legal protection for notaries must be formulated in two main forms, namely preventive and repressive protection. Preventive protection includes clear regulations and effective oversight to prevent potential misuse or criminalization of the notarial office. Meanwhile, repressive protection is required when a notary is subjected to criminalization or violation of rights, in the form of adequate legal assistance. One essential mechanism in this context is the obligation for law enforcement officers to obtain prior approval from the Notary Honorary Council (Majelis Kehormatan Notaris, MKN) before initiating any investigation against a notary. As custodians of civil secrets, notaries must be optimally protected in order to uphold the dignity of the law and ensure legal certainty for the public.
##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.details##

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Hak Cipta :
Penulis yang mempublikasikan manuskripnya di jurnal ini menyetujui ketentuan berikut:
- Hak cipta pada setiap artikel adalah milik penulis.
- Penulis mengakui bahwa Ranah Research : Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Development berhak menjadi yang pertama menerbitkan dengan lisensi Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (Attribution 4.0 International CC BY 4.0) .
- Penulis dapat mengirimkan artikel secara terpisah, mengatur distribusi non-eksklusif manuskrip yang telah diterbitkan dalam jurnal ini ke versi lain (misalnya, dikirim ke repositori institusi penulis, publikasi ke dalam buku, dll.), dengan mengakui bahwa manuskrip telah diterbitkan pertama kali di Ranah Research.
References
Adjie, Habib. Sanksi Perdata dan Administrasi Terhadap Notaris Sebagai Pejabat Publik, (Surabaya: Refika Aditama, 2007)
Adjie, Habib. Sekilas Dunia Notaris dan PPAT Indonesia (Kumpulan Tulisan), (Bandung: CV. Mandar Maju, 2009)
Cahyarini Luluk Lusiati dan Kartika Kismawardani, Relevansi Notaris sebagai Pihak Pelapor Dalam Upaya Pencegahan Tindak Pidana Pencucian Uang”, Jurnal Notarius, Vol. 16, No. 3, 2023,
E. Juanda, Kekuatan Alat Bukti dalam Perkara Perdata Menurut Hukum Positif Indonesia, Jurnal Ilmiah Galuh Justisi, Vol. 4, No. 1, 2016,
Muhammad Raditiya Pratama Ibrahim dan Amad Sudiro, Kewenangan dan Perlindungan Hukum Bagi Notaris Sebagai Pihak Pelapor Transaksi Mencurigakan, Jurnal Masalah Hukum, Vol. 51, No. 2, 2022,
Mulyoto. Kriminalisasi Notaris dalam Pembuatan Akta Perseroan Terbatas. (Yogyakarta: Cakrawala Media, 2011)
Nadhilah Izazi dan Sulistio Adiwinarto, Akibat Hukum Akta Notaris yang Terkait Tindak Pidana Pencucian Uang, Indonesia Journal of Law and Justice, Vol. 1, No. 4, 2024,
Putri A.R. Perlindungan Hukum Terhadap Notaris: Indikator Tugas-Tugas Jabatan Notaris yang Berimplikasi Perbuatan Pidana, (Jakarta: PT. Softmedia, 2011)
Sjaifurracman, Aspek Pertanggung Jawaban Notaris dalam Pembuatan Akta, (Bandung: Mandar Maju, 2011)
Tedjosaputro, Liliana. Etika Profesi dan Profesi Hukum. (Semarang: Aneka Ilmu, 2003)